What made this project… Rolikstraat by Common Wonder

Common Wonder’s work has been shortlisted for this year’s AYAs, with the practice named a finalist for Young Architect of the Year.

In this series, we take a look at one of the team’s projects and ask the firm’s co-founding director, Matthew Ball, to break down some of the biggest specification challenges that needed to be overcome.

What were the key drivers behind the client’s brief, and how did these shape the design and specification approach?

The client’s brief called for a modest garden pavilion that could accommodate work and occasional guests, compromising as little as possible the spatial experience of the existing house. The ambition was not simply to increase floor area, but to rethink the relationship between house, garden and landscape.

This shaped the project from the outset. The building is partially embedded within the site, allowing the roof to become part of the garden. The interior of the studio is organised around a single ‘inhabited’ window opening within which the work desk is set – bringing light, view and work together into a new intimacy. Section, proportion and materials used in their natural form create spatial richness.

The specification follows the same principles. We prioritised a small number of carefully considered materials, selecting elements that could age well and contribute to the identity of the project rather than applying finishes as decoration. Every material choice was considered in terms of longevity, touch and how it would contribute to the continued experience of the building.

What specification challenges did the team encounter, and how were these resolved?

The main challenge was aligning a highly crafted architectural ambition with the practical realities of construction, budget and material availability.

The design relied on precision and restraint, which meant that junctions between materials became particularly important. Rather than increasing complexity, we worked closely with the contractor and specialist suppliers to simplify details wherever possible and ensure that the essential qualities of the design were protected.

A key lesson from the project was the importance to reflect on not only how the building would be made, but how it would weather, early on. Prescient conversations with fabricators and makers helped us understand what could be achieved within the available resources and allowed the final details to feel both robust and carefully made. For example, the decision to celebrate rather then sublimate the drainage channel below the window: a blanket modern approach would have suppressed this detail but we chose to enlarge it – to give it expressive power – which also makes it much easier to clean and maintain.

Looking at this project type more broadly, what are the three biggest specification considerations? How did these influence decisions on this scheme?

1. Durability and ageing. A successful project should improve with time. We selected materials that could withstand everyday use and develop character rather than requiring constant replacement or maintenance.

2. Material coherence. The greatest impact often comes from using fewer materials but using them well. We focused on creating a consistent material language where material and form are intrinsically linked (as in the best vernacular architecture) and thus that each element supports the others in a whole.

3. Craft and detailing. The quality of a building is often experienced at the scale of the hand, the edge of a junction, the texture of a surface, the way light meets a material. Consideration of this – the way that construction can simply ‘be’ and does not need to be hidden behind finishes – influenced both the specification and construction process.

We selected materials that could withstand everyday use and develop character rather than requiring constant replacement or maintenance.

Was there a particular product or material choice that played a standout role in the project?

The most significant choices were the natural materials that form the architectural character of the project: the limestone blocks from northern france and the sustainably logged mahogany sipo wood.

Rather than using materials as surface finishes, we wanted them to provide the atmosphere of the spaces. Their texture, weight and ability to change with light became central to the experience of the project.

The standout quality was not a single product in isolation, but the way carefully chosen materials worked together to create something calm, tactile and enduring.

Were there any suppliers or specialist partners whose input was particularly valuable?

The project depended on a collaborative relationship between architect, contractor and suppliers. The contractor built the timber windows himself, giving them the raw but refined aesthetic only achievable with hand-made windows, while the limestone supplier was pivotal in ensuring that a sustainable, but affordable and textural stone was sourced. The contractor and suppliers became collaborators in the design process.

Looking back at the finished project, what do you feel was its greatest success?

The greatest success is that the project creates a feeling beyond its physical components. It demonstrates that even relatively modest interventions can create a sense of wonder when each decision is carefully considered and crafted.

Full screen in popup

• Previous
• Next

Source: Max Hart Nibbrig

Source: Max Hart Nibbrig

Source: Max Hart Nibbrig

Source: Max Hart Nibbrig

Source: Max Hart Nibbrig

Source: Max Hart Nibbrig

1/8

show caption